User talk:EncycloPetey/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Marsileaceae on DYK 2 Sporocarp and related articles 3 Wikitionary-Indonesian 4 Embryo 5 User Category for Discussion 6 Wiktionary 7 Ant on Moss image 8 Novels Collaboration of the Month 9 3RR warning 10 Three translations... 11 Asking for Help 12 Old images on Wiktionary 13 Problem on Wikitionary 14 Coat of arms 15 Roundel 16 Image tagging for Image:Phaeoceros_spores.jpg 17 Concerning Block 18 Did you know... 19 Monocot stubs 20 Dianella tasmanica taxobox 21 Anise B 22 Ratings 23 Template:Fossil range 24 Bio Star 25 Novels Collaboration of the Month 26 Aphanizomenon 27 Daniel I. Axelrod 28 Jubulaceae 29 Identify species of Image:Ezcaray saltamontes.jpg 30 Barnstar! 31 Alaibot, "Brytophta" 32 Species plantarum 33 Leaf 34 re: Plant physiology 35 DYK 36 Category:Speciesist articles 37 DYK 38 DYK update 38.1 Credits 38.2 Credit templates 39 An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Betalain, was selected for DYK! 40 DYK 41 DYK October 1 42 DYK 43 Did you know 44 request for assistance 45 Pseudoforest DYK nom 46 DYK nom 47 Did you know 48 Plant evo devo 49 DYK updating 50 Re expired noms at DYK 51 Did you know 52 Mimicry, et al. 53 Request for Additions and/or Information 54 DYK 55 Did you know 56 plant cell membrane 57 DYK 58 Battle of Utica (203 BC) 59 Ziggy Pig and Silly Seal 60 Gamma ray burst progenitors 61 Seed diagram 62 Redundant information in Taxoboxes 63 Did you know 64 RE - I can't believe you're bothering to read this... 65 Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide GAC 66 Procaryote 67 GA review of Marsileaceae‎ 68 Novels COTM 69 Barnstar 70 Monosolenium distribution map 71 Admin? 72 Assessment help request 73 DYK: Agatha Christie: An Autobiography & Monosolenium 74 thanks ... 75 Hi 76 Further links 77 On a completely unrelated note 78 Michigan trip 79 Congrats 80 Congratulations! 81 DYK 82 Covering of the Senne 83 Favor 84 A bit of help 85 Reverted links to informational sites 86 About your RfA 87 hey 88 hey

[edit] Marsileaceae on DYK

On 4 January 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marsileaceae, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

— ERcheck (talk) 13:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sporocarp and related articles

This is regarding your proposal to merge fruiting body into sporocarp. There's been a bunch of low-level and scattered discussion as to what to do with the articles fruiting body, sporocarp, basidiocarp, and ascocarp. I have a comprehensive plan for these articles at Talk:Sporocarp. Have a look at this proposal and weigh in on it if you have an opinion. Peter G Werner 17:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?

Of course, I would like to help. But I do not have access to internet much nowadays, so sometimes it could be a hassle if I want to translate something or even provide any articles to wikipedia, I hope you'd understand. But please, don't hesitate to ask. HoneyBee 03:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikitionary-Indonesian

Hello, I am an admin on Wiktionary and am wondering whether you could help with a couple of questions about Indonesian translation. In particular, could you provide good Indonesian translations for the various definitions of listen? (See the sample sentences there for more information.) Also, I am looking for the Indonesian word for minute, in the sense of "a unit of time" or "sixty seconds". Could you help?

Of course, I would like to help. But I do not have access to internet much nowadays, so sometimes it could be a hassle if I want to translate something or even provide any articles to wikipedia, I hope you'd understand. But please, don't hesitate to ask. HoneyBee 03:16, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Embryo

Hi, I noticed that you left a comment at the embryo discussion page. I'm curious. You say that the term "embryology" is usually restricted to apply to early vertebrate development, whereas an "embryo" is a life cycle stage found in all animals, land plants, and some algae and protists. Do you have any cite for this distinction? I had never heard of such a distinction before.

There are quite a few books and articles about "vertebrate embryology", but there are also plenty of books and articles about "invertebrate embryology".Ferrylodge 01:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment at my talk page. I'm a bit confused, though. You said, "the majority of books titled 'Embryology' treat only vertebrate embryology (and sea urchins)." You also said: "when biologists talk about 'the embryo' they almost always imply vertebrate embryo."

So, haven't you said that both the terms "embryology" and "embryo" are almost always used in reference to vertebrates? Ergo, don't the two terms have the same scope? They both usually refer to vertebrates, but sometimes refer to invertebrates too, right?Ferrylodge 19:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your further message. I hope you'll reconsider whether it's okay to merge embryology into embryo. By analogy, fetology redirects to fetus, and I think embryology should likewise redirect to embryo. It seems to me that having the embryology article separate from the embryo article will lead to a great deal of redundant material in both articles, while also giving a confusing impression that embryology means something other than the study of embryos. Thanks again.Ferrylodge 22:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User Category for Discussion

[edit] Wiktionary

Blocking me at wiktionary for only "adding a internal link to a header" for a week is a little extreme. Will you please unblock me from wiktionary? The block makes no sense at all. I thought I was doing a job I thought I could not get blocked for doing but I guess I was wrong:) I am going to look over the policies and guidlines of the place before editing more. Again unblock me. Have a nice week and god bless:) --James, La gloria è a dio 17:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

You did not make just one bad edit, but began a rapid series of them. You have been warned repeatedly about your behavior and edits and have been blocked previously. This block period matches your previous one, rather than extending longer, which is lenient by Wiktionary policy. You have had plenty of time to learn proper formatting, but began a series of bad edits. We don't link every word in every header. We generally don't link part of speech headers. We don't link names of common languages in headers or translation sections. Wiktionary does not have the man-power to clean up after people who begin linking every word on the page. Please look around at some of the model pages for proper formatting before you begin editing again. --EncycloPetey 17:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ant on Moss image

Hello, I would like to know why you feel this image actually belongs, aside from the very minor fact that the ant is walking on moss. It does not demonstrate moss very accurately as 95% of the moss in the picture is completely out of focus, and the subject of the photo is quite clearly the ant.

Please consider these before restoring images that are not representative of the article they are placed in. Just because Fir0002 makes some darn nice images does not mean their pics are above Wikipedia guidelines.

I personally believe that it does not belong. If you disagree, bring it up on the talk page of the Moss article, don't just revert my edit. Thank you. -- KirinX 15:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Novels Collaboration of the Month

You supported The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling, which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR warning

Just so you know, you are very close to violating 3RR on Moss[1][2][3], please stop reverting peoples edits for a day or so. It is fine to revert somebody, but not over and over, there is a discussion on the talk page about the image. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know there is a discussion on the Talk page. If you look, you'll see that I started that discussion. --EncycloPetey 21:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. But discussing is the first step, it is also important to let that discussion come to a conclusion. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

And yet two people began deleting content from the page without starting such a discussion. Once the discussion was started, the content was deleted again so that others would not see the issue being discussed. Hypocritical, no? --EncycloPetey 21:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my late response, I thought we were done. No, not hypocritical, the image is available in the history. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three translations...

Dear EncycloPetey, Thank you for the posting in my userpage...I am travelling now, I will be back to my home tomorrow...Though I added Parrot and Listen sections (I have yet to learn to add Malayalam fonts to Wiktionary), units of time put me in a dilemma, because Malayalm units of time doesn't follow the seconds-minute-hour pattern. Even though we can say "nazhika" means seconds, it is not...The Malayalam units of time, like nazhika, vinazhika and phases of time like yāma have their own units of time. I will try to get more reference and information about the subject before adding information to the Units of Time, thank you so much for the mail. Best wishes, --Cyril Thomas 23:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

• Dear EncycloPetey, Thanks for the info. I will check the Malayalam fonts, and try to update it. --Κυριλλος (Cyril Thomas 21:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Asking for Help

Misplaced article removed from talk page

[edit] Old images on Wiktionary

Hello! I'm a Wiktionary administrator who's glad to see you're still active in Wikimedia. We're in the proces of clearing out the last 50 images and audio files on Wiktionary, and moving them all to Commons. Long, long ago (Jan 2004), you uploaded a couple of images on Wiktionary. Would you mind uploading these two to Commons?

• wikt:Image:Bang_icon_32x32.jpg
• wikt:Image:Smile_icon_32x32.jpg

When you do, please let me know so I may delete the versions on Wiktionary without losing any information. Also, if the file names have to change, please let me know what the new names are. I'd do this myself except that Commons has no migration tool that accomodates Wiktionary, so the image would appear under my name rather than yours, and I don't wish to take credit for your work. Thanks, --EncycloPetey 20:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

These icons have been uploaded to Commons, but as .png images. The references to them on the 3 pages of Wiktionary that used them have been edited to use the PNG images from Commons. The JPGs on Wiktionary may now be deleted. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) 07:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Problem on Wikitionary

Noting that you were trying to remove those images from Wiktionary, I went back to check (by clicking on that link) and they are removed. It shows a link saying that they are missing, you could upload them (which is correct). So I figured, since you don't want any more uploads to Wiktionary (it does make more sense to use Commons) I'd see what happens. Using that link indicates that the page is restricted to sysops, which in this case is valid. But I felt that the PHP source of the page should be edited so that rather than just blandly saying it's a restricted page, it should also say that uploads should be directed to Wikimedia Commons, and have a link to the upload page there.

I was going to suggest this on Wiktionary, so I went to the main page, then went to the discussion page for the main page and discovered someone has locked the discussion page too! While I can understand locking the main page (and it's unfortunate, I was the one who thought up the Quick Index that appears there; if it had been locked at that time I couldn't have done it), I think it doesn't make sense to lock the discussion page, and I recommend the discussion page for the main page on Wikitionary be unlocked. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) 07:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I have discovered that since I wrote this, that page is now unlocked. Don't know if it was you who unlocked or some other administrator had temporarily locked it and then unlocked it, but if you did, thanks! Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) 07:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

We've had a lot of recent vandalism edits to the Main page talk. I didn't lock (or unlock) it myself, but I can understand why it might be locked against unregistered users. Most general conversation now happens in one of the four community fora, all available from the left side of the page. --EncycloPetey 08:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coat of arms

I have removed the offending link on this page. - Andre Engels 12:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roundel

Thanks for the improved fountain! —Tamfang 03:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Phaeoceros_spores.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Phaeoceros_spores.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Block

Dear Mr. EncycloPetey:

I recently learn that you had put a block on my account for the copyright violation an on-line web based dictionary. I understand this is serious and have just now found a way to contact you. The addition of copyrighted material was a mistake. Not to sound like I am trying to excuse it but it was very innocent. When I work on dictionary entries I typically copy the contents into Notepad, fill in the changes and than recopy it into the text area after I am finished. I found the parole definition wanting so I went to look at various definitions in other sources to make sure that the stated definition was correct. I placed a copy of one definition in place of the Wiktionary definitions as a reference, so that I don't have to keep flipping back and for between pages. When the storm hit, I quickly copied and pasted the translations that I had been working on, onto the same page as the copied definition. When the Internet finally came back on a few moments later, I quickly pasted all of the contents of the Notepad into the text area and saved it so that I wouldn't have to retype all of my translations. I forgot that the copied definition was still there. I was unaware that I had pasted copyrighted material until you brought it to my attention. I really am sorry and I do promise to be more circumspect next time, but I honestly didn't mean to put banned material onto the website. How would that benefit me? I hope that you will let me continue to contribute to Wiktionary and remove the block. I will change my editing habits in the future. Sincerely, Andy85719 03:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

That does not seem a plausible explanation to me, since the exact same copyvio definition was shortly before entered by an anoother user, resulting in a reversion and block on that account. Nor does it explain why other pages you have edited suffer from the same copyright violation issue. You had been previously warned about suspicious entry additions on your part. You will have to wait until the block has ended to continue contributing, and be sure not to copy definitions or translations from dictionaries again. Neither definitions nor translations may ever be taken from copyrighted materials and added to Wiktionary. --EncycloPetey 03:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr. EncycloPetey:

I feel aggrieved. After posting a warning and giving me a 3 day block, you have taken it upon yourself to block my access for an indefinite period of time alleging copyright violations. You have accused me of lying about events in the past and of committing systematic copyright violations. In a way I feel that I am being bullied. I am sure that you are a reasonable person and can understand that I, as a newcomer to the wiktionary site, wasn't aware that single words were copyrighted. I also didn't know that you couldn't use other Wikipedia pages to get translations for words. I assure you that in no way did I intend to violate copyright law. Please do not penalize me so severely. You point to warnings, though the only ones I received were one's about "awkward" translations and switching Mandarin with Chinese. I am extremely sorry for the mishap with parole but I truly had no intention of breaking the law. Though you may choose not to believe it, the storm did cut my Internet off and the events occurred as I explained. I am on my summer vacation, and have very little to do. I don't see how blocking me indefinitely before telling me that what I was doing was wrong is a good remedy at all. I would happily take the three day suspension but an indefinite block seems unreasonable. As a sysops, isn't it your duty to teach newcomers on the appropriate manners of contributing, rather than punish them when they slip up, especially considering that you yourself are a teacher. I hope you will be moved to change your mind. Sincerely, Andy85719 19:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The extended block was only made after additional investigation and consultation with another sysop. We found that this was not an isolated incident on your part. You had inserted copyrighted material from on-line source into several articles over an extended period covering several days, not a single article accidentally as a result of storm issues. This means that you have not only violated copyright law, but that you have falsely claimed otherwise. You should know that information displayed on copyrighted websites is in fact copyrighted. Your persisted claim that the problem was powerloss from a storm is flatly untrue. You are blocked. --EncycloPetey 02:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know...

On 17 August 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article plant morphology, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 21:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice work! Richard001 22:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

On 22 August 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Takakia, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Hi; sorry it's been a while since I last updated DYK and it looks like I made a bit of a mess with the nominator templates; fixed now. DYK gets updated around every 6 hours, so feel free to submit as many good new or recently expanded articles as you can muster.--Peta 00:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monocot stubs

Lists, as you requested. The lists were all generated by category intersections using AWB. Let me know if your spot-checks turn up anything out of place. Cheers, --Rkitko ^(talk) 14:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dianella tasmanica taxobox

You made changes to Dianella tasmanica's taxobox.. I haven't checked them, but if your changes are correct then they need to made to Dianella too. —Pengo —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 13:41, August 26, 2007 (UTC).

Thanks. There are an enormous number of monocot pages whose taxobox will need checking. Some of them follow the Cronwuist system, some follow APG II, and some of them don't seem to follow either. The placement in the Hemerocallidaceae is based on Dahlgren's The Families of the Monocotyledons. --EncycloPetey 15:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anise B

That was quick :-)) I'll agree Anise is a "lowish B" - I did think a bit about it, but came to the conclusion that it's definitely better than a Start, the criteria for B-ness aren't that high :

"Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR)."

Sure there's "some gaps" on the botany side, it's a way from GA-ness, but hiving off some of the introduction and expanding it a bit would solve that. I was in the middle of a post to the Plants Talk page that might clarify what I was up to ;-/ Cheers FlagSteward 23:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

But it doesn't have "a majority of material needed for a comprehensive article" in terms of coverage for WP:PLANTS, so I would rate it as "Start". --EncycloPetey 23:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Well we're getting into a debate about what a 'majority' is, aren't we? Personally I see it as over half way there, (but nothing like 90% there for instance), but am happy to let you call it. So I've dropped it to Start - it still means there's one less Stub in the world ;-/ FlagSteward 03:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ratings

You're doing an excellent job with the importance ratings, they're better than 99% right on target, in my opinion--some of the best ratings work on Wikipedia. I'm not going to rate my own articles for now on. KP Botany 03:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Fossil range

Hm - interesting! I'd been told that the fossil ranges were not displaying in the right places, with some dinosaurs coming up as preCambrian. I've not had the chance to get on an apple so thought it would be better to remove the template until I'd tested it - although perhaps my meddling inadvertently fixed it by mistake! I'll take a look at it this evening and see what my browser makes of it, then possibly restore it. Thanks for the heads up!

Verisimilus T 10:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bio Star

		The Bio-star
		For your work on plant and related core articles, have this Bio Barnstar. Circeus 14:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Novels Collaboration of the Month

You supported The Firm (novel), which has been selected as the Novels WikiProject's new Collaboration of the Month. Please help improve this article towards featured article standard. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aphanizomenon

Hey bud, any thoughts on this one? Cheers! bd2412 T 02:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. I've added a little information, cited a reference, and converted the stub to {{bacteria-stub}}. Is that the sort of thing you meant? I could probably find more information if I had the time, but htings are very busy for me this week. --EncycloPetey 04:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daniel I. Axelrod

Thanks.[4] I did not think they would just be on UCMP, but of course they would be. KP Botany 04:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

UCMP is the official repository for key fossils in the state of California. They've even absorbed the the LA County Museum's paleobotanical collections. I actually spent time at UCMP helping to catalog their paleobotanical type specimens and getting the taxonomy of the specimen database filled out. (Before that, you could only search the database by genus, which wasn't very useful if you were looking for all the specimens in a particualr family or order.) I have a number of photos from Axelrod's collections, but am not certain whether I have the rights to scan and upload them. I'll do so if UCMP gives me the green light, though I would have to find access to a slide scanner as well. --EncycloPetey 04:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jubulaceae

Hey, can you explain the "Suborder:Incertae sedis" thing to me. I got that off of wikispecies, and just presumed it to be accurate. Cheers! Murderbike 00:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

It just means that someone didn't know where it belongs. I've been updating the liverworts on Wikispecies, but haven't done the leafy liverworts yet. The "traditional" suborders aren't especially useful and have been overturned by more recent studies. In any case, the whole high-level classification will probably be overturned in the next few years now that there's a good whole-evidence phylogeny available. For now, I'm following the orders and suborders according to Schuster (as it's the most widely-used and familiar system), but with the updated division name, classes, families, and genera of Stotler & Crandall-Stotler (2000). I'd have followed the Stotler's complete taxonomy except that (1) no one is using it, and (2) it doesn't match any phylogenetic hypothesis that's been published. --EncycloPetey 00:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Identify species of Image:Ezcaray saltamontes.jpg

Hola

I've uploaded a photo of a flower that looks similar to the images of Calendulae already existin in Commons, but I don't know much of flowers. Might you identify it? Muchas gracias. --Javierme 22:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no sources on plants of Spain. My experience is with liverworts and ferns, mostly. --EncycloPetey 23:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar!

		The Original Barnstar
		For I much appreciated your work on Marchantiophyta, which was very helpful for my Taxonomy of the Flora exam. Aelwyn 20:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alaibot, "Brytophta"

As best as I can recall at this remove, I think the plan was to create a redirect from {{Brytophta-stub}} to {{Brytophte-stub}}, given that was the form used in the "source", the better to cope with the fuzziness of that application. But evidently I didn't, and also didn't double-check any of the edits in that particular short "batch" of edits. At any rate, operator error of some permutation. My bad. Alai 15:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Species plantarum

Nice edits but... are you following me? ;-) (just kidding, I enjoy very much cooperating with others). SOLANUM caule inermi herbaceo foliis pinnatis incisis, racemis simplicibus means NIGHTSHADE, (with a) herbaceous stem without spines (=inermis), pinnate incised leaves, simple racemes. Is incised a word used for the shape of leaves in English? How should it be translated? And what about inermis, any more technical term than without spines? Is the translation worth including? Species in latin means type or kind, whether it was already used in a modern sense I don'know. And, BTW, what do you think about moving the discussion about Top priority stubs to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Plants/Collaboration, as I have proposed? All in all it was you who started it! Bye! Aelwyn 15:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I just happen to have put all 6 Top priority plant stubs on my Watchlist, so I saw your edit comment and had a go at tdying the English. I'd also some some preliminary looking in my personal library for additional information. I think there's a good deal more we could add to the article, but I don't have the details. I'll have to see about making a trip to Berkeley at some point so I can use their library.

Yes, incised can be used in English to describe the leaves. I'll have to check the OED for meanings of "species". I'm a sysop on Wiktionary, and their entry for species is definitely in need of work. I think moving collaboration discussion to the Collaboration page is a fine idea. --EncycloPetey 15:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leaf

It is wrong:"Ferns do not have cotyledons, but they have true leaves." Because true leaves is a botanical term. See cotyledon in [5], true leaves, true leaf, or true leaf --Ricardo 17:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand what you are trying to say. Ferns have leaves; you can see them yes? Ferns do not have cotyledons. If you can provide evidence that ferns have cotyledons, please cite a source. Every source you gave me says that cotyledons are found in seed plants, and ferns are not seed plants. --EncycloPetey 18:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This search finds journal articles discussing "true leaves" in ferns. The UC Davis website is wrong. --EncycloPetey 18:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you have some practical experience in plant propagation. However some plants, for example Fabaceae, have firstly two leaves (cotyledons leaves) very different to the others, which are typical compound leaves. Ferns have the same kind of leaves during all life, so this term can't be used by ferns because it is not meanigful. All ferns leaves are always "true leaves" because leaves of ferns have always the same shape. --Ricardo 21:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the term can be and is used meaningfully with ferns. Vascular plants have true leaves because the leaves contain vascular tissue, the leaf blade is divided into tissue layers, and the epidermis is penetrated by stomatal openings. Bryophytes lack vascular tissues, internal differentiation, and have no stomata on their "leaves". Therefore morphologists say that bryophyte leaves are not "true leaves". --EncycloPetey 22:02, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

We are used this term with a different mean and both are correct. I used this term mainly for plant propagation, and you are used it for plant anatomy. --Ricardo 22:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Plant physiology

I rewrote the hook for Plant physiology as the DKY editors wanted the text to refer to the accompanying picture. Please review the new hook and change it as you desire. Regards, --Mattisse 18:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm fine with the hook appearing in any format that isn't factually wrong. I'm more concerned with getting publicity for the newly enlarged key article. --EncycloPetey 18:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

I'm on it. Thanks for the ping -- Samir 00:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Speciesist articles

Hey there, I just saw your comment on Librarianofages' talk page. Thanks for the chuckle! But, um, what about viruses and prions?? :)

Anyhow, I'm not sure if you saw the CFD notice that was posted at Category:Speciesist articles shortly after you left your note for Librarianofages. But I thought you might like to know that the category is about to be deleted. Such a shame. Cgingold 12:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 26 September 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article plant physiology, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK update

Hi Petey,
I've updated DYK as you asked, but I don't have the time to inform the article creators and nominators. Could you do that? Below, I've pasted the relevant info. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure; all done. --EncycloPetey 22:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Credits

[edit] Credit templates

• Article talk page: ({{dyktalk}}) {{dyktalk|12 June|2008}} (check if small style templates in use, if so add small=yes parm)
• Article creator's talk page: ({{UpdatedDYK}}) {{subst:UpdatedDYK|12 June|2008|Article name}} --~~~~
• Nominator's talk page: ({{UpdatedDYKNom}}) {{subst:UpdatedDYKNom|12 June|2008|Article name}} --~~~~

[edit] An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Betalain, was selected for DYK!

On September 30, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Betalain, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 06:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 1 October 2007, a fact from the article The Lady of the Lake (poem), which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, D_arkF_alls ^talk 06:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK October 1

Did you know? was updated. On 1 October 2007, a fact from the article Early editions of the Hebrew Bible, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 17:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

On 1 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Trowulan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 17:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 2 October 2007, a fact from the article Lost in Beijing, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, D_arkF_alls ^talk 01:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Did you know? was updated. On 2 October 2007, a fact from the article War in Abkhazia (1998), which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 15:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] request for assistance

Hi - pardon me, but I have made an error in creating an article, Freedmen's Savings Bank. The actual name is "Freedman's Savings Bank" - is it a problem? Is it possible to remedy this problem. Thanks, K a r n a 22:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I have moved the article to the correct title. --EncycloPetey 02:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks! Now I understand that "move" function - wasn't sure and didn't want to screw up using it. Thanks again, K a r n a 02:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pseudoforest DYK nom

Thanks for the DYK nomination for pseudoforest! I hope you don't mind that I suggested tweaking it a little. I had already been thinking of nominating it myself, but your nom spurred me to work harder at making my prose readable. —David Eppstein 04:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be a force for article improvement :) I used to read Martin Gardner's articles on Topology and have dabbled in it a bit ever since, though I've never had a formal course (sigh). Most of my college mathematics was limited to analysis and statistics. --EncycloPetey 05:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK nom

Did you know? was updated. On 3 October 2007, a fact from the article Diamond (gemstone), which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Wizardman 19:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

On 4 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ingram de Ketenis , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 01:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plant evo devo

Hi EncycloPetey...Nice to know you will be involved too with this project. If you've looked the creation time, I created this project just today, and still is very much in the discussion phase. There has been a suggestion that we generate a taskforce on plant evo-devo rather than as a separate project. What is your opinion? Also, I propose the users start mentioning their area of expertise, or atleast, the area they are most comfortable with, so that coordination between each other becomes easier. What do you say? Gauravm1312 02:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it might be better to work as a sub-project rather than as a task force. I think that in part because evo-devo overlaps with a few other independent projects such as MCB. --EncycloPetey 12:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK updating

Thanks for starting the next update (which is now overdue). I noticed that you included three that were related to the United States. I'm not sure if you follow WT:DYK, but there has been a lot of criticism about over-Americanization of DYK, and I wanted to warn you to be cautious about that. (No more than two per country is the usual rule of thumb.) I realize most of the oldest entries are American, which makes it harder, so we may have to use three. Rigadoun (talk) 18:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I had noticed that, but had also noticed that nearly all of the soon-to-expire nominations were from the US as well. (If you want the list of nominations I add to Template talk:Did you know, you'll see that almost none of them deal with the US, precisely because I want to keep potential listings as topically and regionally varied as possible.

In putting together the Next Update, I deliberately left space for additional nominations, and would not at all have been surprised or upset if someone had moved a nomination back from the Next Update to the Talk page. DYK selection is a community process, and I simply wanted to have as much as possible started on the Next Update to lessen the work others would need to do. Thanks for the advice! --EncycloPetey 21:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re expired noms at DYK

Generally it's been my feeling that one-day expired nominations can be included, as the supply of decent articles varies substantially from day to day, so that backlogs of usable items are common. Moreover, often problems are only noticed at the last minute, meaning that good-faith efforts to fix the articles result in an article that becomes usable only when technically expired. Could you possibly join the discussion at the talk page about this? Regards, Espresso Addict 14:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Which talk page? I could not find the discussion. Also note that the currently scheduled update is blocked by our school site, so whatever is on the next update could block schools from access to the main page if it's put up. --EncycloPetey 15:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The discussion is at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know -- generally a good page to watch if you update here regularly, as it's where changes to the rules are discussed. I didn't understand what you meant by "blocked by our school site", I'm afraid -- could you explain? Espresso Addict 15:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

My guess with the blocking is Ivo's recent edit summaries (the talk page may be blocked for that reason too). There isn't anything objectionable on the next update template, so if that's the reason, it won't be a factor for the main page. Rigadoun (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Espresso Addict updated the main page. Can you check to make sure you can see it? I can't think why it would be blocked. Rigadoun (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

As Rigadoun suggested, the problem looks to have been the expletives in the edit summary, so I'm hoping that all should be well. Shout if there's a problem! Cheers, Espresso Addict 16:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Did you know? was updated. On 5 October 2007, a fact from the article Literature of Egypt, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 23:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mimicry, et al.

Re: your great idea at plants. You might be interested in this recent news story http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/05/2052512.htm. I left the title off, it was a bit rude. The complexity of the relationships is mind boggling. Cheers, Cygnis insignis 04:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew about the phenomenon in the Araceae but hadn't previously seen a cycad example. --EncycloPetey 06:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

It was interesting that heat to flipped the signal back and forth. I'm looking forward to the article. Regards, Cygnis insignis 06:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Additions and/or Information

I am currently trying to write a 'wiki' page on Agroecosystem Analysis. I would truely value any input you may have towards the subject. Please feel free to pass on the topic to anyone you know who might have an interest in agroecosystems. I am completely new to this format and am learning as I go. Thanks for your time!

Sorry, but that's not a subject I've ever studied. --EncycloPetey 23:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 8 October 2007, a fact from the article bluestripe snapper, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri 00:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Did you know? was updated. On 8 October 2007, a fact from the article Michelsberg culture , which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 16:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] plant cell membrane

becouse the file you gave me was a png it ended being easier to create a new one than editing the one you gave me. if you need anything changed let me know -LadyofHats 17:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 12 October 2007, a fact from the article Mechanisms and processes of evolution, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Utica (203 BC)

On 13 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Utica (203 BC), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 21:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ziggy Pig and Silly Seal

On 14 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ziggy Pig and Silly Seal, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 09:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gamma ray burst progenitors

Did you know? was updated. On 14 October 2007, a fact from the article Gamma ray burst progenitors, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seed diagram

hi, i couldnt find another image from the Cornus sericea seed. i didnt want to make a direct copy so i was looking for other seeds diagrams wich may contain what you were looking for. from those i made 2 diagrams:

I do not know weather this are the ones you need, or if it "must" be the same kind of seed you mention. Please let me know.-LadyofHats 18:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

• • here is the avocado seed, i hope i got the parts right. if you have any changes let me know -LadyofHats 14:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

ok it is changed-LadyofHats 15:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redundant information in Taxoboxes

How is a conservation status relevant to an organism that became extinct 400 million years ago? By the same token, is it necessary to include a cross, which is understood by a small proportion of the readership, when the "fossil range" makes it clear that the genus is not extant? For the division, I could follow the argument, but it seems redundant as is. Taxoboxes rapidly become cluttered and including redundant information seems a step in the wrong direction.

Verisimilus T 14:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. You might be interested in discussion on the tree of life talk page; this edit removes redundant information which does not alter the formatting - I imagine that is what you refer to.

All the best, Verisimilus T 16:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know

Did you know? was updated. On 24 October 2007, a fact from the article Origins of Falkland Islanders, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

On 24 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Colombian folklore , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

On 24 October 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Haplomitriopsida, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 16:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE - I can't believe you're bothering to read this...

That comment let's people know where they stand right away. I like it!

I came here because of the liverwort article, which I enjoyed.

I have seen liverwort growing in an old greenhouse. Can you tell me, is deliberate culture of liverworts practical? Thanks, Wanderer57 20:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide GAC

Hi there, just a note to let you know that if you had any questions about the article I'm not going to be editing as much as normal over the next few days so I might not respond immediately. Tim Vickers 21:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that this article has been marked "under review" by you for over a week. Might I suggest that you either decide to pass, fail or put on hold the articles or remove the "under review" notice so that others may review the article? Cheers, CP 21:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I've been making thorough notes and requesting advice on how to proceed. Now that I have the advice, I'll be posting the review today. --EncycloPetey 21:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Procaryote

hoy, i was wondering if you have a more acurate source for a new diagram of a procaryote cell, i was left rather unconfortable with the idea of the old one not being complete or acurate enough.. do you have anything i could use?-LadyofHats 10:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review of Marsileaceae‎

I'm sorry, but the article has failed GA review. I have left constructive comments on the talk page, and I wish you and the other contributors well in your efforts to improve this article. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance whatsoever. Have a wiki day! Mmoyer 03:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I saw your reponse on my talk page, and am doing a bit of research. I want to make a thoughtful, constructive reply, but have been a bit short on time the past day or two. I expect to respond in another day or two as my schedule permits. Thanks for your patience! Mmoyer 17:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added some comments only (no vote) to the discussion for the appeal to explain my thought process. I readily admit that this is only my fifth GA review, so I will learn more by reading others opinions on this matter. Please be patient with me. My only intent is to "do the right thing". Thanks! Mmoyer 23:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Novels COTM

Thanks for doing the switchover for this very helpful work. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		I, BorgQueen, award this barnstar to User:EncycloPetey for the tireless work on scientific articles. Please keep up the good work. 06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I agree with your view on WP:ACID. We need to change the system. BorgQueen 06:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monosolenium distribution map

I just added a new one, with the updated information, to the page. Cheers, heyjude. 02:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure. As long as I have distribution data, I can make a map from it. Just let me know which articles need maps. Cheers, heyjude. 19:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin?

Hi there, would you have any use for the admin tools? You seem very well-qualified if you wished to apply. Tim Vickers 22:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I've been on the fence about that, mostly since I'm an admin on Wiktionary (where the policies and procedures are very different). But sure, OK. Then I could help with the DYK updates. --EncycloPetey 22:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Tim Vickers 22:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a careful read through your contributions and write up a recommendation this evening. Tim Vickers 22:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment help request

Would you be able to search through all the articles currently assessed for WP:PLANTS and determine which ones are actually redirects? I've been finding assessments on redirect pages, and this seems like cleanup that could be automated--moving the assessment to the target talk page, or removing it if the target already has an assessment template. I'd do this myself except that I have so idea how to go about doing such a search or automating the replacement. --EncycloPetey 16:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I've found a few of those, too. I gave it some thought and couldn't come up with a way to locate WP:PLANTS article talk pages with article page redirects. I'm sure there's got to be a way, but I only use AWB with my bot, which I don't think can do that. We could ask over at WP:BOTREQ to see if anyone with more knowledge could help us. --Rkitko ^(talk) 02:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

If you know whom to ask for help, and where to ask it, you already kow more about it than I do. I've never used a bot; all my editing is manual (or as manual as you can get while using a computer). --EncycloPetey 03:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Success! I'm letting BotanyBot crawl through the entire list of plant articles on a setting of "do not follow redirects" with instructions to make a dummy edit if the text "#REDIRECT [[" is found on the article page, thus saving a list for us to work on. Now, it's going to take a long time to complete the list. I've had it running overnight (about 14 hours, now) and it's only gotten through 7,000 articles. 18,000 to go. But here's an initial list that needs to be fixed. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 17:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

And going and going and going... 9,000 more articles to scan. I updated and moved the list to User talk:EncycloPetey/Redirects so it wouldn't clutter up your talk page here. The list should be completed shortly. Cheers, Rkitko ^(talk) 20:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

All done! :-) Let me know if you want some help correcting those. --Rkitko ^(talk) 05:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK: Agatha Christie: An Autobiography & Monosolenium

Did you know? was updated. On 10 November 2007, a fact from the article Agatha Christie: An Autobiography, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--PFHLai 07:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

On 10 November 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Monosolenium, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--PFHLai 08:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks ...

...for reverting vandalism on my pageJackaranga 02:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

More than welcome. --EncycloPetey 06:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi Pete, re Liguus ... I got a bit confused by the current hook, as my reading of the article was that it wasn't clear that the colour/collecting caused the extinction .. and I wasn't sure that I wanted to make collecting sound appealing. Be that as it may (as these are minor failings as the article is the truth, not so much the hook),... Im not an admin so cannot make the change... but I don't object to it. Vic aka Victuallers 16:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Further links

Hi there. I've linked the DYK item to some more articles as you suggested - all except the link to shell which I piped through to gastropod shell, see what you think - I've purged the changes through. Bobo. 16:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, sorry. I see the link now - I viewed the link on the page without looking at the page source. Hopefully the item is as you wish it to look now. Bobo. 16:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On a completely unrelated note

And at the risk of putting a complete kibosh on your current 100% support rate, your Request for adminship is going rather well. Hopefully I'm not out of the realms of fortune to be wishing you premature congratulations on what I have witnessed from you in the past is going to be a very well-used set of tools - just a shame that this correction to the DYK column wasn't needed tomorrow, otherwise you could have done it yourself! What timing.

Congratulations. Bobo. 16:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michigan trip

Hope I'm not too late, but I've been sick most of this past weekend and so haven't tried to do anything that involved too much thinking.

Could you photocopy some portions of the following article for me?

• Piippo, S. 1990. Annotated catalogue of Chinese Hepaticae and Anthocerotae. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 68: 1-192.

The portions I'm interested in are:

1. Abstract
2. References cited
3. Maps at the outset (if any) that summarize geography covered in the article
4. The section on Marchantiales (if separated from other groups in the article); if not I'd be happy with the pages covering Monosolenium
5. The section on Anthocerotae

Thanks, --EncycloPetey 16:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, not too late! I decided to go today (Tuesday) instead and I checked my talk page once I got here. Your item has been copied! I just need to transform it into a pdf and you should receive it soon. Hope you feel better! --Rkitko ^(talk) 18:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

All ready to be mailed to you! E-mail me through the site with your e-mail address so I can send you the pdf. Cheers, --Rkitko ^(talk) 23:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Welcome to the DYK team!! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

Congratulations! You are now an administrator! Secretlondon 01:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Cool! New toys. --EncycloPetey 01:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! If you have any questions just drop me a note on my talk page. Tim Vickers 22:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

My congrats, too; I know you'll do well. :) I'll get back to Acetabularia soon as well; I've gotten a bunch of scientific papers from various places, which I'll digest once I have a moment to breathe. Back to enzymes! (huff, huff) Willow 00:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You'll do well. Just don't get too distracted from doing your awesome article-writing. bibliomaniac15 21:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 14 November 2007, facts from the articles The Big Blowdown, and Nurses and Midwives Tribunal, which you recently nominated, were featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Covering of the Senne

No problem, I don't hold it against you. I moved the article into the namespace instead of copy-pasting. Is this proper form, or should I copy-paste next time? Also, in the case of an article which took so much work, it would probably be better to alert the author next time, though I realize this isn't always possible. Have a nice day! -Oreo Priest 17:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Favor

Hi EncycloPetey, you might have noticed that your nomination was one of several others I made over that last week, this was partly spurred by the threat of IPs being allowed to create new pages, but also has a more general objective. This other reason for this effort was that I have been a little disturbed by a growing attitude that admins are more than just editors with a few more buttons on their toolbars and are instead "senior editors" with greater authority. I decided that the best way of dealing with this idea was to greatly expand the pool of admins to include a wider diversity of the pool of editors.

Since you have now passed the selection, could you in turn select and nominate some people you trust - I'd suggest aiming for about three over the next month or so. Of those who are selected, could you ask them in turn to select and nominate three candidates. Such a chain of trust should result, over time, in a greatly enlarged pool of admins and thus provide a simple and effective way of spreading the responsibility - perhaps to the point where becoming an admin is seen as normal and expected, rather than a major achievement. I hope you'll be able to help me with this. Thank you. Tim Vickers 22:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It's an understandable position, and one supported by POLICY, so I'll see whom I can find. I'm sure it would help if more people had the keys to the broom closet. --EncycloPetey 22:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

That would be great, I looked through the apparently endless discussions on how to improve RfA, but they didn't seem to be heading anywhere - the simplest way of achieving our goals seemed for us to just nominate more people. Tim Vickers 22:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A bit of help

Could you give a look to my last image the Image:Flagellum base diagram.svg.i had troubles finding good sources and i am not sure i got everything right -LadyofHats 20:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I will be busy for a few days, but will reply shortly. You obviously did a lot of work on the diagram, as usual. --EncycloPetey 03:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverted links to informational sites

Don't understand why you have reverted links to external sites which were added this evening (eg, tracking, orchids, ferns etc). All links were to non-commercial sites. The sites do not sell anything. They are purely informational in nature. They do have ads, which help to pay hosting costs. Have read guidelines for creating links to external sites and the links seem to be in line with this. The external sites have plenty of relevant supplementary information of value to visitors to Wikipedia. Please enlighten me. There must be something I am not understanding. Thank you very much!

The sites were a series of systematically added spam-links added to commercial websites selling products. Please see item #6 Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided. The site being linked is mostly adspace. --EncycloPetey 05:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

With all due respect, you do need to take a much closer look at those websites. The Home Pages of those sites do not have a lot of info, as they are portals to the rest of each site, gateways to the extensive information behind it. They are most definitely not commercial sites with "mostly ad space". They do not exist for the purpose of placing ads. They are not commercial sites. They are packed with information, purely for the information's sake. Those sites were created and are maintained purely for the sharing of information, for the love of it, over many years. Truly a labour of love. Without any expectation of monetary return. (Hmmm, similar to Wikipedia?) The sole purpose of the ads is to offset hosting costs. The sites are not vehicles for ads. That is not their purpose. Having read "Wikipedia:External_links#Links normally to be avoided" the only possible criteria that could be used against these sites is #6, "Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising". And IF these sites come under that, well that is indeed a first in the many years that they have been online!! Normally the response to the sites is one of gratitude for sharing the information. I do undertand the concept of controlling spammers, as I have to deal with large number sof them on a daily basis in forums I administer. Spamming, I respectuflly submit, is most definitely not happening here, in my opinion. Perhaps the effort I am making in this inquiry is an indication of the sincerety of these claims? Thank you for taking the time to read my remarks.

Even without the ads, the various .com sites were not appropriate to the pages where they were added. (see #14 in the link above) A page about ferns in the Canadian province of Ontario is an inappropriate link for an encyclopedia article about all ferns of the world that have existed throughout all of time. Likewise for other similar link placements. Wikipedia is not a link catalog to the internet; it is an encyclopedia.

If you are sincere in your effort, why did you wait until after the block to respond to postings requesting that you cease your spamming? --EncycloPetey 06:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About your RfA

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 02:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You're are very welcome! I'm very pleased to hear of your success! Enjoy the tools. :-) Lradrama 15:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on your new sysop bit. Thanks for your good work here. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 21:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hey

can you please unblock so i can add more well produced enteries? the raccoon from wiktionary thank you please inform that semperblotto does not like me as he calls me a vandal

That's not my call, and as I said it's only for 24 hours. There are ways to use that time productively towards new entries even without being able to edit. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hey

this is urgent i got blocked by semperblotto why? the raccoon from wiktionary? maybe you could inform when i'am getting unblocked? --Alaop (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks like you were blocked for 24 hours for hasty contributions that required a lot of cleanup. Usually that means you need to look around at how pages are formatted during the block time. Wiktionary block policies are very different from Wikipedia policy, because the data structure is very, very important. Wiktionary is also very short-handed on monitoring new contributors, so blocks are more likely to happen there than on WP.

Since it's only 24 hours, my suggestion is to use the time while you're blocked to look back at your list of contributions, and study how others modified your initial pages. That way, when the block ends, you'll have a much better idea of what the community is trying to achieve and produce better start entries. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)